Financial and non-financial performance measurement system on managerial performance through prosedural fairness and trust in superiors in manufacturing companies in Indonesia

Anton Arisman, Kathryn Sugara, Yulizar Kasih, Usniawati Usniawati

Abstract


The purpose of this study is to investigate the effect of Financial and Non-Financial Performance Measurement System on Managerial Performance through Prosedural fairness and Trust in Superiors in Manufacturing Companies in Indonesia   The data used in this study is primary data with a sample about 153 respondents. The results of this study indicate the financial performance measurement system and non-financial performance measurement system have a positive affect on procedural fairness. However,  financial performance measurement system does not affect on trust in superior. The financial performance measurement system also does not significantly affect on trust in superior. However, non-financial performance measurement system has effect on trust in superior. The financial performance measurement system and non-financial performance measurement system have a positive effect on managerial performance. The limitation of this study has low R2 and doing the survey. The suggestion for future research can more investigate with other variables such as role clarity, role conflict, interpersonal trust and psychological empowerment.  The last suggestion for future research is the qualitative method in their research, such as interview and case study.


Keywords


Financial and non-financial performance measurement system; managerial performance; prosedural fairness and trust in superiors

Full Text:

PDF

References


Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator–mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol.51, No.6, pp.1173–1182.

Chong, V. K., & Chong, K. M. 2002. Budget goal commitment and informational effects of budget participation on performance: a structural equation modeling approach. Behavioral Research in Accounting, Vol.14, pp.65–86.

Hall, M. (2004). “The effect of Comprehensive Performance Measurement Systems on Role Clarity, Psycological, Empowerment and Managerial Performanceâ€. Global Management Accounting Research Symposium. Available on www. ssrn.com

Hall, M. 2008. The effect of comprehensive performance measurement systems on role clarity, psychological empowerment and managerial performance. Accounting, Organizations and Society, Vol.33, pp.141–163.

Hall, M., 2011, “Do comprehensive performance measurement sistems help or hinder managers’ mental model development?â€, Management Accounting Research, Vol. 22, pp. 68-83.

Horngren, C.T., Foster, G., Datar, S.M., 2002., 11th ed. Cost Accounting: A Managerial Emphasis, 11 Prentice-Hall, USA.

Hopwood, A.G., 1972. An empirical study of the role of accounting data in performance evaluation. Empirical research in accounting: selected Penelitianes. Journal of Accounting Research, Vol.10, pp.156–182 (Supplement).

Ittner, C., and D. Larcker. 1998. Are nonfinancial measures leading indicators of financial performance? An analysis of customer satisfaction. Journal of Accounting Research, Vol.36, No.3: pp.1–46.

Ittner, C., and D. Larcker. 2003. Coming up short on nonfinancial performance measurement. Harvard Business Review 81 (11): 88-95.

Ittner, Larker dan Randall, 2003, “Performance implications of strategic performance measurement in financial services firmsâ€, Accounting, Organizations and Society, Vol. 28, pp. 715-741.

Kaplan, R. 1983. Measuring manufacturing performance: A new challenge for managerial accounting research. The Accounting Review, Vol. 58, No.4: pp.686–705.

Kaplan. 1984. The evolution of management accounting. The Accounting Review 59 (3): 319–418.

Kaplan dan Norton. 1996. Using the balanced scorecard as strategic management system. Harvard Business Review 74 (1): 75-85.

Kaplan, S. E., and J. T. Mackey. 1992. An examination of the association between organizational design factors and the use of accounting information for managerial performance evaluation. Journal of Management Accounting Research 4: 116-130.

Kaplan, R.S., Atkinson, A.A., 1998., third ed. Advanced Management Accounting, 3 Prentice-Hall, USA.

Lau dan Lima, 2002, “The Intervening Effects of Participation on the Relationship between Procedural Justice and Managerial Performance‟, British Accounting Reviewâ€, vol. 34, pp. 55-78.

Lau, C.M., Lim, E.W.b, 2002. The effects of procedural justice and evaluative styles on the relationship between budgetary participation and performance. Advances in Accounting, Vol.,19, pp.139–160.

Lau, C. M., & Sholihin, M. 2005. Financial and nonfinancial measures: How do they affect job satisfaction? The British Accounting Review, Vol.37, pp.389–413.

Lau dan Tan, 2006, The effects of procedural fairness and interpersonal trust on job tension in budgeting, Management Accounting Research, Vol. 17, pp. 171–186.

Lau dan Moser, 2008, “Behavioral Effects of Nonfinancial Performance Measures: The Role of Procedural Fairnessâ€, Behavioral Research in Accounting, Vol. 20, No. 2, pp.55- 71.

Lau, Wong dan Eggleton, 2008, Fairness of performance evaluation procedures and job satisfaction: the role of outcome based and non outcome based effect, Accounting and Business Research, Vol. 38, pp.121-135.

Lau, 2011, †Nonfinancial and financial performance measures: How do they affect employee role clarity and performance?â€, Advances in Accounting, , Vol.27, pp.286-293

Lind, E.A., Tyler, T.R., 1988. The Social Psychology of Procedural Justice. Plenum Press, New York.

Locke, E. A., Shaw, K. N., Saari, L. M., & Latham, G. P. 1981. Goal setting and task performance. Psychological Bulletin, 90, 125–152.

Locke, E.A., Latham, G.P., 1991. A Theory of Goal Setting and Task Performance. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey.

Locke E.A., dan G. Latham, 2002, Building a practically useful theory of goal setting and task motivation: 35 year Odessey, American Psychologist, Vol.57, pp.705-717.

Lynch, L., and K. Cross. 1991. Measure Up. London, U.K.: Blackwell Publishers.

Mahoney, T. A., Jerdee, T. H., & Carroll, S. J. 1965. The job(s) of management. Industrial Relations, pp.97–110.

Malina, M. A., and F. H. Selto. 2001. Communicating and controlling strategy: An empirical study of the effectiveness of the balanced scorecard. Journal of Management Accounting Research 13: 47-90.

Malina dan Selto, 2004, “Choice and Change of Measures in Peformance Measurement Models,†Management Accounting Research, Vol. 15, pp.441-469.

Marginson, D., Ogden, S., 2005. Coping with ambiguity through the budget: the positive effects of budgetary targets on managers’ budgeting behaviours. Accounting, Organizations and Society, Vol. 30, pp.435–456.

McFarlin, D.B., Sweeney, P.D., 1992. Distributive and procedural justice as predictors of satisfaction with personal and organizational outcomes. Academy of Management Journal, Vol.35, pp.626–637.

Merlinger, G, 1956, Interpersonal trust as factor in communication, Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, Vo.52, pp.304-309.

Morse, W.J., J.R. Davis and A.L Hargreaves. (2000) Managerial Accounting: A Strategic Approach. 2nd edition. South_wastern College Publishing.

Mulyadi, 2001. Balance Scorecard: Alat Manajemen Untuk Pelipathganda Kinerja Keuangan Perusahaan Salemba Empat. Jakarta

Olve, N. G., J. Roy, and M. Wetter. 1999. Performance drivers: A practical guide to using the balanced scorecard, New York: John Wiley & Sons.

Otley, D.T., 1978. Budget use and managerial performance. Journal of Accounting Research, Vol.16, pp.12–148.

Otley, D., & Pollanen, R. M. 2000. Budgetary criteria in performance evaluation: a critical appraisal using new evidence. Accounting, Organizations and Society, Vol.25, pp.483–496.

Otley, 2001. Extending the boundaries of management accounting research: Developing systems for performance management. British Accounting Review 33 (3): 243-261.

Parker, R.J., Kyj, L., 2006. Vertical information sharing in the budget process. Accounting, Organizations and Society, Vol. 31, 27–45.

Read, W.H., 1962. Upward communication industrial hierarchies. Human Relations, pp.3–15.

Reina D.S. dan Reina, M.J, 1999, Trust and betrayal in the workplace: Building effective relationships in your organization. San Fransisco; Berret Koehler.

Scott, T. W., & Tiessen, P. 1999. Performance measurement and managerial teams. Accounting, Organizations and Society, Vol.24, pp.263–285.

Sholihin dan Pike, 2009, Fairness in performance evaluation and its behavioural consequences, Accounting and Business Research, Vol. 39, No. 4, pp.397-413.

Sholihin, Pike, Mangena dan Jing Li, 2011, Goal-setting participation and goal commitment: Examining the mediating roles of procedural fairness and interpersonal trust in a UK financial services organization, The British Accounting Review, Vol. 43, pp. 135–146.

Sholihin, Na’im dan Lau, 2004, The effect of Multiple Measures based Performance Evaluation on Managers’ Performance: The Role of Procedural Fairness and Interpesonal Trust, Studies in Managerial and Financial Accounting, Vol. 14, pp.235-262.

Wentzel, K., 2002. The influence of fairness perceptions and goal commitment on managers’ performance in a budget setting. Behavioral Research In Accounting, Vol. 14, pp.247–271.




DOI: https://doi.org/10.30872/jinv.v18i0.11233

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c) 2022 Anton Arisman, Kathryn Sugara, Yulizar Kasih, Usniawati Usniawati

Crossref logo 

Editorial Address

INOVASI: Jurnal ekonomi, keuangan dan manajemen
Faculty of Economics and Business, Mulawarman University
Jl. Tanah Grogot No.1 Samarinda Kalimantan Timur 75119
Email: jakt.feb.unmul@gmail.com

StatCounter: INOVASI: Jurnal ekonomi, keuangan dan manajemen